a second-class citizen

vandad

Senior Member
Persian
Second-class citizen is an informal term used to describe a person who is systematically discriminated against within a state or other political jurisdiction, despite their nominal status as a citizen or legal resident there. While not necessarily slaves, outlaws or criminals, second-class citizens have limited legal rights, civil rights and economic opportunities, and are often subject to mistreatment or neglect at the hands of their putative superiors. Instead of being protected by the law, the law disregards a second-class citizen, or it may actually be used to harass them.
*Let me know please, if there is any equivalent for "Second-class citizen" in Polish.
 
  • Ben Jamin

    Senior Member
    Polish
    Second-class citizen is an informal term used to describe a person who is systematically discriminated against within a state or other political jurisdiction, despite their nominal status as a citizen or legal resident there. While not necessarily slaves, outlaws or criminals, second-class citizens have limited legal rights, civil rights and economic opportunities, and are often subject to mistreatment or neglect at the hands of their putative superiors. Instead of being protected by the law, the law disregards a second-class citizen, or it may actually be used to harass them.
    *Let me know please, if there is any equivalent for "Second-class citizen" in Polish.
    Purely lexically it is 'obywatel drugiej kategorii', but some of the elements of your definition are not quite fitting. In the use I have been acquainted with (chiefly British) a 'second class citizen' has all the formal rights (they are not legally limited), but is not treated as equal by other people and sometimes by the authorities. A a 'second class citizen' is discriminated against, but oficially nobody admits that it is so. The discrimination may be related to race, social standing, ethnicity, sex or even health situation of the individual.
     
    Many people do that nowadays. :)

    It seems even "reasonable" when someone is replying just below the n-th (n>1) post, so that the readers will know for sure if he's responding to the general issue of the thread or only to the poster above him.
     
    I know what you mean, but sometimes the post is very short and addresses only one specific point. ;)

    Anyway, I agree that to quote the entire original post, when you are actually the first one to respond to it, seems completely pointless. :)
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top